In self-service retail establishments, cartons of cigarettes and similar articles are usually exposed for sale on racks consisting of vertically spaced shelves on which the articles are arranged in stacks. Although the merchandise in such a rack is accessible substantially only from in front of the front edges of its shelves, the racks heretofore used for such displays have permitted free access to the entire space above each shelf, so that a person who wished to do so could very quickly and easily remove a large number of articles from any of the shelves. By smuggling the removed articles out of the store, such a person could steal as much as several hundred dollars worth of merchandise with very little effort and without great risk of being detected.
It is a premise of the present invention that shoplifting losses can be minimized--even though they cannot be completely prevented--by an expedient that partially blocks access to display shelves to prevent quantity removal of articles from them but nevertheless permits removal of one article at a time by a legitimate shopper.
It is perhaps obvious that this can be accomplished by installing a transparent panel in front of each stocked shelf of such a rack, located to block access to all but one or a few of the articles on the shelf, as disclosed in Malacos, U.S. Pat. No. 1,435,935. However, it has not heretofore been obvious how this solution could be implemented without giving rise to other problems. If the panel is securely fixed in place on the rack, it prevents or impedes restocking of the shelves so that, considering the value of stock clerks' time, it may eventually cost more than it saves. If the panel is easily moved out of the way, or if the manipulations needed for moving it out of the way are readily apparent from inspection, then it has little value as a security device. Another important consideration is that the security device be inexpensive in itself and capable of quick and easy installation, so that the cost of installing it is in line with potential savings it achieves. Obviously such a security device should not detract from the appearance of the display and should not present any material inconvenience to legitimate shoppers who serve themselves from the rack it protects.
As examples of prior attempts to solve the problems addressed by the present invention, reference may be made to U.S. Pat. Nos. 1,913,231, 3,464,748 and 4,130,326. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,007,853 and 4,305,628 are typical of prior art unit-dispensing display cabinets that can be stocked through a lockable door at the rear of the cabinet. Such an arrangement is clearly unsuitable for a cabinet or rack that stands against a wall or stands back-to-back with another cabinet or display rack.